Toshiba developing small N-reactor / Reactor by Blackhawk Mines Corp

[kathtagumi23]

Toshiba Corp. has been developing a small nuclear reactor for mining oil sands at the request of a firm engaged in such

mining projects in Alberta Province, Canada, and aims to begin operating the reactor by 2020, it has been learned.

As the situation regarding the construction of new nuclear power plants and reactors in Japan remains unclear, Toshiba's move will likely attract attention as an effort toward utilizing the nation's nuclear technology in fields other than power generation.

Oil sands are sandstone deposits which contain a viscous form of petroleum, and can be used as petroleum-based fuel.

Compared with oil fields, it has so far been difficult to develop oil sands. However, technological advances have led to the promotion of oil sands development in Venezuela and Canada. Canada is said to have about 100 oil sands deposits totaling about 170 billion barrels--the equivalent of about 100 years' worth of petroleum consumption in Japan.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Yes, and theres oil in shale, and oil off shore.
Whats interesting here is, as ecologically minded as Canada is, this is going on, which to me says its a clean and low footprint way of obtaing the oil, as well as harming the local enironment.

 

[dogman_1234]

Why not just build the reactor as a main power source then, instead of using to obtain another resource?

 

[wanamingo]

Why not just build the reactor as a main power source then, instead of using to obtain another resource?

That was my first thought too....

Isnt nuclear technically the cleanest energy source we have? - Aside from wind, solar, tidal, etc.

 

[dogman_1234]

No, not technically. If we find a way as humans to use the waste after the initial decay of uranium-235, we could call it clean. However, with all the plutonium, neptunium, americium, and polonium it produces due to the reaction chain, we have to call nuclear energy 'dirty'. It is ozone friendly, yes, but it is not our cleanest source of fuel. Our cleanest source of fuel is water, that is ionized water that is later combusted within an all electric chamber.

There is; however, an idea of a reactor type called a LFTR.( pronounced: Lifter)

It stands for Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor. It is a molten salt reactor that uses less spent fuel than a conventional heavy water reactor like a CANDU.

Here are some wiki's to the subjects:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CANDU_reactor

Here is a Youtube about LFTR:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYxlpeJEKmw

 

[Kiowa789]

Why not just build the reactor as a main power source then, instead of using to obtain another resource?

Because you can't put a reactor in a Car.

 

[dogman_1234]

Because you can't put a reactor in a Car.

I do not think anyone suggested that we should...

 

[johnsonma]

Because you can't put a reactor in a Car.

Technically, doesn't a car already have a reactor in it since the combustion of fuel is technically a chemical that undergoes a reaction to stimuli? I am guessing you meant a nuclear reactor.

 

[johnsonma]

That was my first thought too....

Isnt nuclear technically the cleanest energy source we have? - Aside from wind, solar, tidal, etc.

Nuclear power has had a stigma associated to it ever since Chernobyl and now Fukushima. I really think we need more nuclear power plants in this country.

 

[wanamingo]

Try to avoid a rear end collision in a nuclear powered car, the last time there was an accident we lost 80% of Delaware.

Thoruim would be cool , and Doggy got me interested enough to watch a documentary about LFTR. Its a cool tech.

But when you look at where our energy comes from the Big three are Coal(Along with natural gas), Hydro, and Nuclear. The safest and cleanest of those is Nuclear.

 

[dogman_1234]

Nuclear energy is safe. The issue associated with it comes with the Three Amigos: Three Mile Reactor, Chernobyl, and Fukushima-Daichi.

We also seem to have an environmental issue as well. We want the power, but not the waste. When a uranium plant is in operation, U-235 is not only burnt, but other elements are bred. Some elements can be used in medicine or semiconductor fabrication. We don;t know how to recycle the spent fuel; save if for depleted uranium used in armour and radiation shields in the doctors office.

Another nuclear energy we are too ignorant to fund: Fusion. Yes, we are many decades from it being a reliable source, but so was placing a man on the moon in the 1950's. We have many bright and young physicists and nuclear engineers. We can make it happen. Look at the National Ignition Facility.

Thorium would be great. China and India are way ahead of us in the thorium race. We have an abundant supply of the crap! However, the environmentalists pushed the EPA in a corner and threatened them to place regulations on rare earth elements to protect the environment. I do say we can find ways to harvest stuff like thorium safely and as clean as possible. Again, we just need funding for R&D. Thorium produces less waste and can use up some left over waste form uranium plants. Another added bonus; thorium cannot be weaponized, so countries like Iran can build these things and not scare the crap out of the International Community.